Not only did he shoot his wife, the cops let him visit her so that he could intimidate her even further. How many cases has there ever been where a guy can shoot his wife and then go visit her in the hospital? That behavior is called "witness tampering". By the time it's over they will be giving the chief a parade and a bonus.
ok I should not find this funny becasue the poor woman is in critical condition, bu my first thought after reading the story was "HAPPY NEW YEAR BABY!"
was it, or did someone lose their temper that day? if Obama did that we would of never heard the end of it...... .
The story is getting hilarious every day. The chief and his victim were married for eleven years and then they got a divorce in 1999. He then married another woman for ten years and split. Boomerang! He marries his first wife again in early 2014. So how did the dummy shoot his wife? He calls 911 and calmly tells the dispatcher that he had just shot his SLEEPING wife in the BACK and in the FRONT. Later on he claims that the gun on the nightstand and that he somehow got it while he was sleeping and plugged his wife. They couldn't cover it up since the woman was shot but they reduced it to one gun shot instead of two. That plays better for it being an accident instead of attempted first degree murder. Peachtree City chiefs 911 call: Oh my God how did this happen? http://www.ajc.com/news/news/investigation-of-peachtree-city-police-chief-could/njfML/ You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes or Kojak to solve this case.
What's your excuse for the chief shooting his sleeping wife in the back? Do you think he "feared for his life"? Maybe he thought she was charging him like she was a big football player sacking the quarterback? I'm sure someone will explain it all away. The chief is still getting paid.
Since the law says he is innocent until proven guilty, the employer - especially if it's a governmental agency - has to pay the guy until he's found guilty in a court of law. Remember, he hasn't been convicted yet; in the eyes of the law he's still innocent. You may not like the system, but it is what's in place now.
same is true of Brown no? ... innocent until proven guilty in a court of law I also guess the same would be true of the man alleged to have killed two cops.... right? .
Well, the guy who killed those two cops is dead so I don't think he's getting paid anything. Unless someone is planning on putting his corpse on trial. I'd pay good money to see that.
Accidents happen and they can happen to anyone... I'm assuming you should know that by now? But m/b not b/c you're now into the juvenile bull(*)(*)(*)(*) of guessing that m/b Cheney 'lost his temper...' As far as I'm concerned, NO, if Obama had a freakish accident, injuring a friend, he should not be criticized.... and idiots guessing about what 'really' happened.
Well if it was an accident then what does that say about guns in the hands of professionals? I think horrible gun accidents should be a crime, even more so when at the hands of a cop
I have no clue how this shooting happened and no one else does either right now. How can an accident be made a crime? A crime is usually planned, a conscious tho't to do something that's illegal. An accident is just that.
The word that comes to mind is negligence. In my mind there is no such thing as an accident where a gun is concerned; oopsy daisy just doesn’t cut it. Remember that cop that left his gun under the seat out here a couple years ago. What a horrible shame that was, but I’m afraid no lesson learned.
Thanks for the daily joke. I'm going to use that in some of my future comments. "An accident is when a 30 year cop shoots his sleeping wife in the back."
The thing is, we're talking about a police veteran of - how long, almost thirty years? This guy has likely seen every trick in the book and then some when it comes to perps staging crimes and "accidents". So I dunno, doing something this stupid deliberately THEN staging it like an idiot? I wouldn't expect someone who knows better to be that obvious. Don't get me wrong, I'm giving this guy some side-eye here - but I'm torn between that and thinkin' someone with that much experience can't be that dumb, so maybe it was indeed an accident. Or maybe that's what he WANTS us to think. Or maybe he wants us to THINK that's what he wants us to think. Or perhaps he wants us to think that we're thinking he's thinking what we're thinking. Or maybe he's thought of that and wants us to think that we thought he's thinking that we thought of that. Or maybe he wants us to think that we thought he'd think that we would think that he thought of us thinking this in order that we wouldn't think of what he thought we were thinking of his thinking we thought he would not think that he wouldn't think we thought of his thinking that he wouldn't think that we thought that he would think of it.
I agree. There ARE gun accidents, but they're are so rare as to be negligible. Don't point your gun at anything you don't want to shoot comes across as a primary rule of gun safety, along with don't put your booger finger on the bang switch until you are ready to fire. Negligence can result in manslaughter charges. We don't know the specifics of this case but it should be considered a possibility at this point, along with more serious charges depending on the evidence. What I'm 100% sure of is the St. Louis County DA will not be weighing in.
I dont have an excuse. Ill wait for the evidence to be reviewed. If hes guilty then Ill clap for the punishment he gets.
I can explain. It seems pretty funny to me that a professionally trained chief of police w/ 30 years experience as a LEO could "accidentally" discharge his gun twice. This whole story is very "funny".
Well every time an officer is taken out it seems the left believe its funny. Next time you need their help be sure to tell him a good joke.